du Plooy v Taylor [2015] NSWLEC 1072

du Plooy v Taylor [2015] NSWLEC 1072

The applicant did not provide evidence, and the Court did not observe anything, showing that either tree was likely in the near future to drop branches, fail entirely, cause damage to property, or injure a person. The requirements of section 10(2) of the Act were not met, so no orders could be made.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Class 2 Application Pursuant to Section 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Two Trees / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
The application is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['tree Removal' 'alleged Future Property Damage' 'alleged Risk of Injury' 'jurisdiction Under Section 10(2) of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Class 2 Application Pursuant to Section 7 of the Trees (disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 Concerning Two Trees / Principal Judgment After Hearing

  1. 1 ["Whether either tree has caused, is causing, or is likely in the near future to cause damage to the applicant's property." 'Whether either tree is likely to cause injury to a person.' 'Whether the jurisdictional requirements under section 10(2) of the Trees (Disputes Between Neighbours) Act 2006 were met so that orders could be made.']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant did not provide evidence, and the Court did not observe anything, showing that either tree was likely in the near future to drop branches, fail entirely, cause damage to property, or injure a person. The requirements of section 10(2) of the Act were not met, so no orders could be made.

Court Disposition

The application is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']